I cannot support any project that "buys out" aka kicks out - anything from thier own home or property. I love how the county/state can literally do whatever they want WHERE ever they want. A home is a home for a reason and they can just come and take it away at any time. It really angers me. Yes i understand they will be paid off for the house and relocation expenses BUT the point of it is that this family picked THIS house to be thier HOME... there is a different between just any house and a Home..
I don't have a problem with the traffic circle, they are a safe, efficient way to manage traffic flow in both rural and urban areas. I DO have a problem with using eminent domain to build this one.
I suppose somebody, somewhere could come up with an example of a good time for the state to use eminent domain and convince me that it's necessary, but this isn't it.
I agree with Chris and Bob. I cannot support tearing down a 200 year old house to put up this traffic circle. Too often we tear down our history rather than work with and around it!
I have a friend who drives truck and he says he hasn't met a rotary that worked for truckers, even the one on 65, which appears to me to be bigger than most. Rotary's do appear to save lives, but there must be a way to make them work for truckers, especially out here, and we can't use them at the cost of history and freedom.
If it prevents deaths then it's worth using eminent domain to build the traffic circle, infrastructure and road safety is one of the things that the government should do. We need to let go of the 'nostalgia' that's been a major part of our economic decline and seeking historical preservation in every single circumstance.. For proof of this, check out the acrimonious battle over building a new peace bridge plaza that has held up the endless development and building of a new peace bridge in Buffalo.
I feel for the people losing their home, but I'm more thinking of all of the people that have died at that location and how a traffic circle would prevent more deaths. There is no coming back from death, how many of those people that died could have gone on to do great things for the world? Of the young people lost there, how many doctors, (good) lawyers, pastors, businessmen/women, tradesmen and teachers have we lost there? Of everyone in general, we don't know what potential they would have had to serve their fellow man and at least lived out their lives. The people losing their home should be of course reimbursed fairly for the cost of their home but can we put their wanting to stay in their home over the right to life and safety of everyone else?
How about replacing the flashing red light with a real red light where you stop and wait until it turns green? It sure would save a lot of money and their home, even if it would be a minor inconvenience.
Dan, this isn't about nostalgia or preserving the bricks in a crumbling building. Your example is the domain of irritating NIMBYs in Erie County. This is about displacing a family when there are solutions available that wouldn't require it.
Rumble strips and strobes should cover this just fine. If those were in place, there could be no reasonable excuse for running through this intersection without stopping unless you're doing it on purpose.
As pointed out by Chris and others, the problem is not Rt 20, but the side roads leading into it. A roundabout would be a major waste of money. You don't take a person home when there is no need to do it.
How many vehicles cross Route 20 at this intersection in a day? ...a hundred, two-hundred? Are past accidents due to drunk driving? ...risk-takers? ...non-locals, unfamiliar with the crossing? ...poor lighting? Obviously, there are contributing factors no precaution can undo. There are four intersections in the space of a few miles: Texaco Town, Transit Road, East Road and Bethany Center Road. Excepting a bridge at Bethany Center Road and Texaco Town being well-lit; what makes East Road more dangerous than Transit Road? It would be far more cost effective to drop the speed down and add some warning signs on Broadway (which would have to happen anyway with a traffic circle) than build a traffic circle that presents a whole new set of risks.
Terry, that was the government wanting to take real property from a private owner and sell it to another private party(Pfizer). In this idea of a roundabout, NY is going to retain "ownership" of the property for traffic safety reasons, which in this instance I find unnecessary.
I rarely use Rt 63, as I am vary wary of the Canadian truckers that use this 2 lane highway as a shortcut. If constructing these roundabouts would deter 18 wheelers, I'd be all for them.
Bud, if the state decided not to use some of the more sensible solutions and the person that has true ownership of that property wants to keep it,what violent steps would you take to remove them. Could you do it yourself or would have some other armed agency do it while sit cozy in your own property.
Terry, the sensible solution is rumble strips on both sides of East Rd. approaching Route 20. I am not saying I do or don't condone an eminent domain action. I would need more information to reach that conclusion.
...As for the rumble strips, I haven't been down East Road in awhile. Last I knew it was in pretty poor condition. They'd have to rebuild the road to support the rumble strips (which in all likelihood would have less shock-effect than the broken pavement). Surprised this road gets much traffic (aside from locals) since the Hideaway, T & C and Watkins Hotel turned out the lights.
There are plenty of vehicles that somehow do not see the double stop signs and red flashing light, but some of the worst accidents at this intersection have been the result of people who actually make the stop and then pull out in front of westbound vehicles. This is the direction you can clearly see approaching traffic for a mile. Henceforth the intersection's moniker "Suicide Corners" as it makes no sense as to why people pull in front of traffic they can see.
It seems unlikely, but East Rd carries over 1500 vehicles per day. There have been suggestions of placing rumble strips or making it a stop light instead of a flashing light, but neither solve all of the problems. Rumbles strips won't stop anybody from stopping and then pulling out in front of oncoming traffic. A stop light isn't visible to eastbound traffic on Broadway (Rt 20). Reducing the speed limit won't work because people won't follow it, and it still doesn't stop people from pulling in front of traffic. I encourage those who question these solutions to read the studies performed by the state at this intersection over the years. The roundabout, while not trucker friendly, is one of the few improvements that addresses all the needs.
However, I disagree with the state report on one area. That is that the removal of the hill west of the intersection would not improve the safety of the intersection. Most of the "suicide" type accidents are the result of people who become fixated on the lack of visibility to the west and then forget to look east before pulling out. Increasing the visibility to the west eliminates this fixation and therefore makes a combination of other, less costly fixes viable alternatives. With increased visibility to the west, rumble strips would help--just as they do on Rt 20A and Rt 77. Removing the hill also makes a stop light an option as well. The state was too quick to dismiss removing the hill saying that speeds into the intersection would only increase and make accidents more deadly. I'm not sure the hill slows anyone down now and people may actually slow down if they could see an oncoming intersection and cars awaiting to cross or turn.
The state will give many opportunities for the public to comment on the design and I hope that people will contribute their thoughts and opinions to make the process successful.
I live on Broadway road in Alexander! We first of all DO Not need to displace a FAMILY! We also do no NEED to spend a ton of money on a traffic circle. There are other options, that have been spoke of here, like proper lighting, warning signs and dropping the speed limit. Keeping drunk drivers off our roads may also help. Displacing this family is completely unconstitutional. Spending money we don't need to spend is just outrageous to me.
Off set East Road, so both north and south come to a "T" at route 20...no longer an "intersection". (works in Canada)
OR:
Move the intersection (or offset) farther to the East, for better visability to the west, and to give those coming from the west a little time to react to a situation.
AND:
No one should ever have to give up their home against their will for ANY reason.
You could put an actual traffic signal at the intersection. As for not seeing the light in time coming from the west I think someone said, well in Northern Nevada the state has similar issues with hills and what I call "surprise" intersections. They solved it by placing a warning light that begins to flash prior to the traffic signal changing to red with enough time for drivers to slow down and make a stop at the signal. It works for them it could be a solution here too.
Richard, a T-intersection? Seriously? The T-intersection at East Rd/ Rt 63/ E Bethany-Le Roy rd is a royal pain in the arse. I traverse that intersection twice daily and it's a wonder more people aren't killed there. I often have to go like a bat out of hell then brake hard in order to get from one intersection to the next. I know you'll say that I should just wait for traffic to clear before making my turn but that's often not possible. I'd spend 10 minutes there if I did.
I believe that a T-style intersection at suicide corners would make it even more dangerous. The very fact that there are no rumble strips in the north and south bound lanes on East Rd remains a mystery to me. Rumble strips are a proven method for significantly reducing collisions at problematic intersections. They're inexpensive and they work.
I've driven through the intersection at suicide corners literally thousands of times (twice each work day for 6 years when I worked in Henrietta) and the hill to the west is not a problem. Vision to the east is wide open. Are people over complicating how to get through there? Look both ways and go, period. The real problem remains that people run the lights because of driver inattention. Rumble strips are an obvious answer to the problem. Why are they being avoided like the plague?
I find the news report this morning on the whec website to be a bit ironic. An intersection with the same problems as suicide corners USED to have rumble strips but no longer does. They've even resorted to parking an ambulance at the intersection.
Quote from the news article: "Chief Wagner, who's alerting the public about this intersection, is hoping the town will put the rumble strips back in the roadway"
Dan I do not see how "nostalgia" is the reason for our economic decline. I believe the opposite is true. The we can just build what ever we want, when ever we want, and throw away the old with no cosideration of cost or how we ( or more likely our children) are goingto pay for it is the problem .
As for the roundabout I have had friends who have lost loved ones at this corner. My arguement is not that more shouldn't be done about safety but how to more effectively and cost efficiently this can be done A roundabout does not meet either of these criteria.
First of all I would like to thank all of youb for your support and input in regards to this round about project. I would like to expand on Howards article. ( thanks Howard)
First I would like to address Lori Maher of the DOT comment about " Dot is looking at is the entire history of the intersection , not just a few years". In the letter dated 8/23/2004 that I recieved from DOT in response to the petition of 2004 that I sent them the DOT used 1997 thru 2002 and added the 2004 fatality for a total of basically 5 year to base their decision. I used 1997 thru 2011 for 14 YEARS for my research. But this isn't as enough? Guess it matters who is counting.
Second the funding and public meetings that I am refering to are being held by Genesee Transportation Council.(GTC) The GTC looks at projects, both highway and bridge and submits them for funding by the Feds under the Transportation Improvement Program (TIPS) project list. The GTC did this in March of 2010 and created a list of projects that DID NOT include the Roundabout. Accoding to the GTC web site that due to an approx. 40% reduction in Federal funding they are revising the project list. The revised list cut approx $6 million in highway projects and $11 million in bridge projects in Genesee County BUT AMAZINGLY ADDED A NEW HIGHWAY PROJECT, THE ROUND ABOUT , AT A COST OF OVER $2 MILLION ( and a lot of blank spaces in the cost column)
I currently am ciculating a petition to present to the GTC opposing the round about project. I will present this to the GTC at one of their public meetingson the revised project list next month.
If you want a copy of any of my information, a copy of the petition , etc. please contact me at suicideroundabout@yahoo.com
Have to go. More to follow including GTC meting dates and contacts
Chris, maybe you think the word violence is hyperbolic (I don't) so lets replace that word with force.
If a group of people (the state) came to me and wanted to remove me from my house and I said "no thanks" wouldn't their next step be to use force.
Tim, I absolutely agree with your altenatve solution scenario using other possible means to achieve a less expensive but effective solution. This is what Deb and I support , not a 2 million plus dollar fiasco.
How ever Tim, I dont totally agree with you about roundabouts being a possible solution at Suicide Corners
You mention that rumble strips wont eliminate the stop and goes. Neither will a roundabout although MVAs SHOULD occur at a lower speed and lesser angle. The people who stop and go will continue to do this no matter what is done.
As to the traffic light not being visible from eastbound a roundabout would also have this problem as the trucks cresting the west hill would not have the sole right of way as they do now and would slow down (?) and may have to stop as they have to yield to traffic in the circle. This could cause a back up of traffic and reduce the sight line and stopping distance further .
Posting a speed limit would not change for either. Speeders are speeders. The trucks have to pull a large grade on either side and make up for it cresting the valley on the west side or on the long stretch to the East. Now instead of flying through a four corners at a median speed of 62 MPH (NYS DOT stat) they would fly at 62 MPH into a 15 MPH designed roundabout hopefully negotiating it and being able to yield to traffic in the circle.
Other issues I have with aroundabout here is snow removal,visibility in winter,maitenance cost,driver error and /or lack of uderstanding of proper use, ( go watch City of Batvia roundabout,its all most amusing at times), drivers unfimiliar with area(a roundabout out in the middle of straight stretch of a State highway in a rural setting), sight being blocked in center circle by design, farm machinery and trucks having to transverse it approx 50 to 100 times daily, deficient bridges needing repair and THE CO!!! WE ARE BROKE!!!.
I dont usually put much faith in studies conducted by the agency using them. They ALWAYS seem to enforce what the agencies want to promote. Remember these people also brought you the Can of Worms in Rochester (Build and rebuild) and the new improved two lane Ellicott St with much enjoyed bike paths. Traffic was backed up from the monument to between Liberty and Swan when I came to work today at 5 PM
As you stated the combination of inexpensive fixes would work when all used together. As I said before we are all for this . How ever I am very adament for the rumble strips. This is do the fact that my son and I were standing in the yard and watched the double fatal occur. They were northboundand and got struck by a southbound semi. I seen them as they went thru the intersection never reducing speed or applying brakes, just talking to each other. They never seen the semi or the corner. They had just gone through the corner earlier , stopped at a residence on the East Rd and were returning shotly after. One victim lived on a nearby Rd. Rumble strips would have averted this fatality. During the 30 plus years we have lived here we have personnally witnessed this scenario countless times,but by the grace of God the MVas were averted or less severe
The previous post two errors that I would like to amend. The first should read COST!!! not CO!!. The second was the double fatal got strck by an eastbound semi not southbound. I apologize for the errors I got interupted while proofing
I cannot support any project
I cannot support any project that "buys out" aka kicks out - anything from thier own home or property. I love how the county/state can literally do whatever they want WHERE ever they want. A home is a home for a reason and they can just come and take it away at any time. It really angers me. Yes i understand they will be paid off for the house and relocation expenses BUT the point of it is that this family picked THIS house to be thier HOME... there is a different between just any house and a Home..
I don't have a problem with
I don't have a problem with the traffic circle, they are a safe, efficient way to manage traffic flow in both rural and urban areas. I DO have a problem with using eminent domain to build this one.
I suppose somebody, somewhere could come up with an example of a good time for the state to use eminent domain and convince me that it's necessary, but this isn't it.
I agree with Chris and Bob. I
I agree with Chris and Bob. I cannot support tearing down a 200 year old house to put up this traffic circle. Too often we tear down our history rather than work with and around it!
I have a friend who drives truck and he says he hasn't met a rotary that worked for truckers, even the one on 65, which appears to me to be bigger than most. Rotary's do appear to save lives, but there must be a way to make them work for truckers, especially out here, and we can't use them at the cost of history and freedom.
If it prevents deaths then
If it prevents deaths then it's worth using eminent domain to build the traffic circle, infrastructure and road safety is one of the things that the government should do. We need to let go of the 'nostalgia' that's been a major part of our economic decline and seeking historical preservation in every single circumstance.. For proof of this, check out the acrimonious battle over building a new peace bridge plaza that has held up the endless development and building of a new peace bridge in Buffalo.
I feel for the people losing their home, but I'm more thinking of all of the people that have died at that location and how a traffic circle would prevent more deaths. There is no coming back from death, how many of those people that died could have gone on to do great things for the world? Of the young people lost there, how many doctors, (good) lawyers, pastors, businessmen/women, tradesmen and teachers have we lost there? Of everyone in general, we don't know what potential they would have had to serve their fellow man and at least lived out their lives. The people losing their home should be of course reimbursed fairly for the cost of their home but can we put their wanting to stay in their home over the right to life and safety of everyone else?
I would love to see an
I would love to see an "example" that justifies using violence against another person to take their property they paid for their own labor.
It didn't work out so well for the people in New London CT.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/nyregion/13pfizer.html#
How about replacing the
How about replacing the flashing red light with a real red light where you stop and wait until it turns green? It sure would save a lot of money and their home, even if it would be a minor inconvenience.
Dan, this isn't about
Dan, this isn't about nostalgia or preserving the bricks in a crumbling building. Your example is the domain of irritating NIMBYs in Erie County. This is about displacing a family when there are solutions available that wouldn't require it.
Rumble strips and strobes should cover this just fine. If those were in place, there could be no reasonable excuse for running through this intersection without stopping unless you're doing it on purpose.
As pointed out by Chris and
As pointed out by Chris and others, the problem is not Rt 20, but the side roads leading into it. A roundabout would be a major waste of money. You don't take a person home when there is no need to do it.
How many vehicles cross Route
How many vehicles cross Route 20 at this intersection in a day? ...a hundred, two-hundred? Are past accidents due to drunk driving? ...risk-takers? ...non-locals, unfamiliar with the crossing? ...poor lighting? Obviously, there are contributing factors no precaution can undo. There are four intersections in the space of a few miles: Texaco Town, Transit Road, East Road and Bethany Center Road. Excepting a bridge at Bethany Center Road and Texaco Town being well-lit; what makes East Road more dangerous than Transit Road? It would be far more cost effective to drop the speed down and add some warning signs on Broadway (which would have to happen anyway with a traffic circle) than build a traffic circle that presents a whole new set of risks.
Terry, that was the
Terry, that was the government wanting to take real property from a private owner and sell it to another private party(Pfizer). In this idea of a roundabout, NY is going to retain "ownership" of the property for traffic safety reasons, which in this instance I find unnecessary.
I rarely use Rt 63, as I am vary wary of the Canadian truckers that use this 2 lane highway as a shortcut. If constructing these roundabouts would deter 18 wheelers, I'd be all for them.
Bud, if the state decided not
Bud, if the state decided not to use some of the more sensible solutions and the person that has true ownership of that property wants to keep it,what violent steps would you take to remove them. Could you do it yourself or would have some other armed agency do it while sit cozy in your own property.
Terry, the sensible solution
Terry, the sensible solution is rumble strips on both sides of East Rd. approaching Route 20. I am not saying I do or don't condone an eminent domain action. I would need more information to reach that conclusion.
Terry, why exactly are you
Terry, why exactly are you hypothesizing about these things? It's a little soon to travel that road, don't you think?
...As for the rumble strips,
...As for the rumble strips, I haven't been down East Road in awhile. Last I knew it was in pretty poor condition. They'd have to rebuild the road to support the rumble strips (which in all likelihood would have less shock-effect than the broken pavement). Surprised this road gets much traffic (aside from locals) since the Hideaway, T & C and Watkins Hotel turned out the lights.
There are plenty of vehicles
There are plenty of vehicles that somehow do not see the double stop signs and red flashing light, but some of the worst accidents at this intersection have been the result of people who actually make the stop and then pull out in front of westbound vehicles. This is the direction you can clearly see approaching traffic for a mile. Henceforth the intersection's moniker "Suicide Corners" as it makes no sense as to why people pull in front of traffic they can see.
It seems unlikely, but East Rd carries over 1500 vehicles per day. There have been suggestions of placing rumble strips or making it a stop light instead of a flashing light, but neither solve all of the problems. Rumbles strips won't stop anybody from stopping and then pulling out in front of oncoming traffic. A stop light isn't visible to eastbound traffic on Broadway (Rt 20). Reducing the speed limit won't work because people won't follow it, and it still doesn't stop people from pulling in front of traffic. I encourage those who question these solutions to read the studies performed by the state at this intersection over the years. The roundabout, while not trucker friendly, is one of the few improvements that addresses all the needs.
However, I disagree with the state report on one area. That is that the removal of the hill west of the intersection would not improve the safety of the intersection. Most of the "suicide" type accidents are the result of people who become fixated on the lack of visibility to the west and then forget to look east before pulling out. Increasing the visibility to the west eliminates this fixation and therefore makes a combination of other, less costly fixes viable alternatives. With increased visibility to the west, rumble strips would help--just as they do on Rt 20A and Rt 77. Removing the hill also makes a stop light an option as well. The state was too quick to dismiss removing the hill saying that speeds into the intersection would only increase and make accidents more deadly. I'm not sure the hill slows anyone down now and people may actually slow down if they could see an oncoming intersection and cars awaiting to cross or turn.
The state will give many opportunities for the public to comment on the design and I hope that people will contribute their thoughts and opinions to make the process successful.
Thanks for the insight,
Thanks for the insight, Tim.
Fascinating to consider that people become fixated on the hill so forget to look for traffic coming from the east.
I live on Broadway road in
I live on Broadway road in Alexander! We first of all DO Not need to displace a FAMILY! We also do no NEED to spend a ton of money on a traffic circle. There are other options, that have been spoke of here, like proper lighting, warning signs and dropping the speed limit. Keeping drunk drivers off our roads may also help. Displacing this family is completely unconstitutional. Spending money we don't need to spend is just outrageous to me.
Like I said following the
Like I said following the original story...
Off set East Road, so both north and south come to a "T" at route 20...no longer an "intersection". (works in Canada)
OR:
Move the intersection (or offset) farther to the East, for better visability to the west, and to give those coming from the west a little time to react to a situation.
AND:
No one should ever have to give up their home against their will for ANY reason.
You could put an actual
You could put an actual traffic signal at the intersection. As for not seeing the light in time coming from the west I think someone said, well in Northern Nevada the state has similar issues with hills and what I call "surprise" intersections. They solved it by placing a warning light that begins to flash prior to the traffic signal changing to red with enough time for drivers to slow down and make a stop at the signal. It works for them it could be a solution here too.
Richard, a T-intersection?
Richard, a T-intersection? Seriously? The T-intersection at East Rd/ Rt 63/ E Bethany-Le Roy rd is a royal pain in the arse. I traverse that intersection twice daily and it's a wonder more people aren't killed there. I often have to go like a bat out of hell then brake hard in order to get from one intersection to the next. I know you'll say that I should just wait for traffic to clear before making my turn but that's often not possible. I'd spend 10 minutes there if I did.
I believe that a T-style intersection at suicide corners would make it even more dangerous. The very fact that there are no rumble strips in the north and south bound lanes on East Rd remains a mystery to me. Rumble strips are a proven method for significantly reducing collisions at problematic intersections. They're inexpensive and they work.
I've driven through the intersection at suicide corners literally thousands of times (twice each work day for 6 years when I worked in Henrietta) and the hill to the west is not a problem. Vision to the east is wide open. Are people over complicating how to get through there? Look both ways and go, period. The real problem remains that people run the lights because of driver inattention. Rumble strips are an obvious answer to the problem. Why are they being avoided like the plague?
http://www.whec.com/news/stories/s2337740.shtml
I find the news report this morning on the whec website to be a bit ironic. An intersection with the same problems as suicide corners USED to have rumble strips but no longer does. They've even resorted to parking an ambulance at the intersection.
Quote from the news article: "Chief Wagner, who's alerting the public about this intersection, is hoping the town will put the rumble strips back in the roadway"
Dan I do not see how
Dan I do not see how "nostalgia" is the reason for our economic decline. I believe the opposite is true. The we can just build what ever we want, when ever we want, and throw away the old with no cosideration of cost or how we ( or more likely our children) are goingto pay for it is the problem .
As for the roundabout I have had friends who have lost loved ones at this corner. My arguement is not that more shouldn't be done about safety but how to more effectively and cost efficiently this can be done A roundabout does not meet either of these criteria.
First of all I would like to
First of all I would like to thank all of youb for your support and input in regards to this round about project. I would like to expand on Howards article. ( thanks Howard)
First I would like to address Lori Maher of the DOT comment about " Dot is looking at is the entire history of the intersection , not just a few years". In the letter dated 8/23/2004 that I recieved from DOT in response to the petition of 2004 that I sent them the DOT used 1997 thru 2002 and added the 2004 fatality for a total of basically 5 year to base their decision. I used 1997 thru 2011 for 14 YEARS for my research. But this isn't as enough? Guess it matters who is counting.
Second the funding and public meetings that I am refering to are being held by Genesee Transportation Council.(GTC) The GTC looks at projects, both highway and bridge and submits them for funding by the Feds under the Transportation Improvement Program (TIPS) project list. The GTC did this in March of 2010 and created a list of projects that DID NOT include the Roundabout. Accoding to the GTC web site that due to an approx. 40% reduction in Federal funding they are revising the project list. The revised list cut approx $6 million in highway projects and $11 million in bridge projects in Genesee County BUT AMAZINGLY ADDED A NEW HIGHWAY PROJECT, THE ROUND ABOUT , AT A COST OF OVER $2 MILLION ( and a lot of blank spaces in the cost column)
I currently am ciculating a petition to present to the GTC opposing the round about project. I will present this to the GTC at one of their public meetingson the revised project list next month.
If you want a copy of any of my information, a copy of the petition , etc. please contact me at suicideroundabout@yahoo.com
Have to go. More to follow including GTC meting dates and contacts
Chris, maybe you think the
Chris, maybe you think the word violence is hyperbolic (I don't) so lets replace that word with force.
If a group of people (the state) came to me and wanted to remove me from my house and I said "no thanks" wouldn't their next step be to use force.
Tim, I absolutely agree with
Tim, I absolutely agree with your altenatve solution scenario using other possible means to achieve a less expensive but effective solution. This is what Deb and I support , not a 2 million plus dollar fiasco.
How ever Tim, I dont totally agree with you about roundabouts being a possible solution at Suicide Corners
You mention that rumble strips wont eliminate the stop and goes. Neither will a roundabout although MVAs SHOULD occur at a lower speed and lesser angle. The people who stop and go will continue to do this no matter what is done.
As to the traffic light not being visible from eastbound a roundabout would also have this problem as the trucks cresting the west hill would not have the sole right of way as they do now and would slow down (?) and may have to stop as they have to yield to traffic in the circle. This could cause a back up of traffic and reduce the sight line and stopping distance further .
Posting a speed limit would not change for either. Speeders are speeders. The trucks have to pull a large grade on either side and make up for it cresting the valley on the west side or on the long stretch to the East. Now instead of flying through a four corners at a median speed of 62 MPH (NYS DOT stat) they would fly at 62 MPH into a 15 MPH designed roundabout hopefully negotiating it and being able to yield to traffic in the circle.
Other issues I have with aroundabout here is snow removal,visibility in winter,maitenance cost,driver error and /or lack of uderstanding of proper use, ( go watch City of Batvia roundabout,its all most amusing at times), drivers unfimiliar with area(a roundabout out in the middle of straight stretch of a State highway in a rural setting), sight being blocked in center circle by design, farm machinery and trucks having to transverse it approx 50 to 100 times daily, deficient bridges needing repair and THE CO!!! WE ARE BROKE!!!.
I dont usually put much faith in studies conducted by the agency using them. They ALWAYS seem to enforce what the agencies want to promote. Remember these people also brought you the Can of Worms in Rochester (Build and rebuild) and the new improved two lane Ellicott St with much enjoyed bike paths. Traffic was backed up from the monument to between Liberty and Swan when I came to work today at 5 PM
As you stated the combination of inexpensive fixes would work when all used together. As I said before we are all for this . How ever I am very adament for the rumble strips. This is do the fact that my son and I were standing in the yard and watched the double fatal occur. They were northboundand and got struck by a southbound semi. I seen them as they went thru the intersection never reducing speed or applying brakes, just talking to each other. They never seen the semi or the corner. They had just gone through the corner earlier , stopped at a residence on the East Rd and were returning shotly after. One victim lived on a nearby Rd. Rumble strips would have averted this fatality. During the 30 plus years we have lived here we have personnally witnessed this scenario countless times,but by the grace of God the MVas were averted or less severe
Thank you for your support and input
The previous post two errors
The previous post two errors that I would like to amend. The first should read COST!!! not CO!!. The second was the double fatal got strck by an eastbound semi not southbound. I apologize for the errors I got interupted while proofing